I would think most GMs operate from pick the best available, as opposed to draft based on positional needs over the next few years.

The reason to trade down from the top pick is belief that there is very little difference in the projected top five (or ten) picks, but it should still command a steep price regardless. If other GM's think they see a difference, let them pay up for it.
- 333inthe3rd

Say CHI gets the #1 and the team that gets #2 really wants a d-man. What would it take to get you to move from #1 to #2, (you still get your choice of the top forwards)?

I would think most GMs operate from pick the best available, as opposed to draft based on positional needs over the next few years.

The reason to trade down from the top pick is belief that there is very little difference in the projected top five (or ten) picks, but it should still command a steep price regardless. If other GM's think they see a difference, let them pay up for it.
- 333inthe3rd

I think you are right, most GMs would operate that way, but I think it only takes 1 or 2 GMs with their own different thoughts on the players to shake things up. I'm sure if you asked 32 GMs around the league to rank the top 5 players in the draft, you would have some outliers, which is why the draft rankings and the order guys are taken don't always align.

Say CHI gets the #1 and the team that gets #2 really wants a d-man. What would it take to get you to move from #1 to #2, (you still get your choice of the top forwards)?
- totem

It would all depend on which team that was. I sure as hell am not trading that thing for more draft picks. I'm looking at a high end young NHLer to start talks.

I think an interesting development would be if the Hawks get the first overall in either this year or next year's draft, does the player they select there automatically become more interesting than Bedard simply because they are the shiny new toy? Especially if they went with McKenna next year.

It would all depend on which team that was. I sure as hell am not trading that thing for more draft picks. I'm looking at a high end young NHLer to start talks.

I think an interesting development would be if the Hawks get the first overall in either this year or next year's draft, does the player they select there automatically become more interesting than Bedard simply because they are the shiny new toy? Especially if they went with McKenna next year.
- Chunk

The team picking second probably will be picking top five the following year, so adding their pick unprotected next year to this year's second pick isn't terrible. Otherwise, it's the second pick plus top prospect(s) or a good proven talent.

Say CHI gets the #1 and the team that gets #2 really wants a d-man. What would it take to get you to move from #1 to #2, (you still get your choice of the top forwards)?
- totem

Here’s another one. Hawks get #1 and Ducks get #4, if the Ducks offer the #4 and McTavish for the Hawks #1 plus a second, do you make that move?

Richardson would need a retainage IMO, with Jones already retained would KD want to leave only one slot open at the beginning of the season.

Kurashev IMO is just filler until the end of the season. The Hawks would have to qualify him for $2.25, his current salary. I think they just let him walk. I actually see him in the KHL next year.
- LAHawk

Maybe you have to retain, but I guess it depends on what comes back the other way. We didn't have to retain on Mrazek. I could see it go either way.

I do think Kurashev's most likely fate is to be a non-qualified RFA too.

Maybe you have to retain, but I guess it depends on what comes back the other way. We didn't have to retain on Mrazek. I could see it go either way.

I do think Kurashev's most likely fate is to be a non-qualified RFA too.
- breadbag

It's really weird. I went through all of the proposed trades on the PuckPedia site, and a bunch of them have Kurashev's rights being traded and the trading team signing him and penciled in anywhere from line 1-3 in the projected 2025-26 lineup. Some of them are just stupid "trade everyone" proposals, but not all of them.

Here’s another one. Hawks get #1 and Ducks get #4, if the Ducks offer the #4 and McTavish for the Hawks #1 plus a second, do you make that move?
- Angotti

I don't think the Ducks would give us that much to move up 3 spots. Not unless there was some belief that McTavish was not going to resign or something.

Maybe you have to retain, but I guess it depends on what comes back the other way. We didn't have to retain on Mrazek. I could see it go either way.

I do think Kurashev's most likely fate is to be a non-qualified RFA too.
- breadbag

The Mrazek trade had a "for the player" element to it. It also included Craig Smith, and Detroit sent a serviceable fourth liner with a $2.275 mill cap hit in return. No draft picks involved. Otherwise, they were waiting until summer for the chance to move him.

Yeah, that would all depend on what you are looking for in return. Right now, I'm not sure those three move the needle all that much in a trade. (despite how much we may like them).
- Chunk

I'm sure any trade starts with Vlasic. Then the other side calls back after KD hangs up.

The Mrazek trade had a "for the player" element to it. It also included Craig Smith, and Detroit sent a serviceable fourth liner with a $2.275 mill cap hit in return. No draft picks involved. Otherwise, they were waiting until summer for the chance to move him.
- 333inthe3rd

I just think JD has some value. Teams might look at our PK for example, we have a good PK and he is a pretty big part of that as the first guy over the boards at forward shorthanded. He is one of the top forward PK TOI men in the NHL and takes a ton of draws on the PK. He doesn't play soft and has some grit to his game. I think if he ends up wanting to move on, they could find him a home without too much trouble.

Its called a negotiation.

I'll never understand what the problem is with reciprical tarriffs.

Example; EU put a 10% tarrif on US autos, US put a 2.5% tarriff on EU cars.

Why does that seem fair or logical to anyone. Trump threatens reciprocal tarriffs of 10% on EU cars into the US.

Yesterday, EU announces they are dropping the tarriffs on US cars into the EU to 2.5%

On the same day Hyundai announces a 20 billion investment into the US on car manufacturing plants, as well as a steel plant.

Someone has to explain to me how any of this makes what Trump is doing (at least on this specific subject) is bad for the American worker and the working middle class.

I'll also add, as a bourbon lover, hoping this allows me to get more stuff i can't normally get
- vabeachbear

VBear, I'm glad a reasonable guy like you posted this. ....... Before I dig in a bit to your point I want to point out to anyone that reads this is the guy behind any "negotiation" for the US is a 6 time bankrupt financial failure. This is the guy running the show!!

Your post is reasonable but without context it's propaganda. .... Any tariffs, deals, agreements with any county is the end result of 80 years of agreement(s). To say x country has a 20% tariff on another without the context of 80 yrs of negotiations that got to that 20% tariff is simply a snapshot of events between the countries involved and offers just a fraction of information.

Now, as Hyundai building plants here it's seemingly wonderful, fantastic but again it's a part of the negotiations that includes hundreds of other products and geopolitical politics (does the US have military bases in that country, defense agreements/treaties, are they buying our weapons). When did these negotiations start?

Face value this is fantastic but so far all I know is plants will be built in the confederecy meaning it's non-union labor and those employees will be paid 10s of thousands dollars less per yr than a union guy.... Never ever ever ever is that good for the "middle class".

Again, the guy running the show went bankrupt 6 times after losing the equivalent of 418 million in today's money that his Pops left him. ....... He'll fail just like your local Burger King will if he ran it.

Interesting. What's your logic here? Most here have been saying that you need the top 1-2-3 picks in the draft to acquire the top talent so that you don't have to pay through the nose to get it via trade or FA, and you get high end play at a discount during the ELC.

What would you be trading for with the 1OA this year?
- Chunk

My thought is SJ needs dmen, see what they would be willing to offer, they would definitely have to trade us their top 4 pick, plus a quality player

Chychryn signs 8 x $9 mil. Obviously Washington doesn’t think there is going to be any significant downturn in NHL revenues.

Chychryn signs 8 x $9 mil. Obviously Washington doesn’t think there is going to be any significant downturn in NHL revenues.
- LAHawk

Chicago was sure the cap was going up when they signed Kane and Toews.

I actually wouldn’t mind of the cap is stagnant next season as it may cause some teams to move out good player or in the case of Toronto not be able to sign Matthew Knies.

Chicago was sure the cap was going up when they signed Kane and Toews.

I actually wouldn’t mind of the cap is stagnant next season as it may cause some teams to move out good player or in the case of Toronto not be able to sign Matthew Knies.
- paulr

The cap is based on this season’s revenue. It is not going to move much from the $95.5 estimate if at all.

The cap is based on this season’s revenue. It is not going to move much from the $95.5 estimate if at all.
- LAHawk

It is the projections for the next 2 years that are murky as rn.

Any GM spending like it is a sure thing needs to have their head examined, tho.

It is the projections for the next 2 years that are murky as rn.

Any GM spending like it is a sure thing needs to have their head examined, tho.
- Elbows15

True especially with the CBA up after next season, and it will be the first CBA that Marty Walsh will be negotiating for the players.

It is the projections for the next 2 years that are murky as rn.

Any GM spending like it is a sure thing needs to have their head examined, tho.
- Elbows15

2012–13 negotiationsA new, lower salary cap limit was negotiated for the collective bargaining agreement starting with the 2012–13 season.

And they will be negotiating a new contract. It might be deja vu all over again

VBear, I'm glad a reasonable guy like you posted this. ....... Before I dig in a bit to your point I want to point out to anyone that reads this is the guy behind any "negotiation" for the US is a 6 time bankrupt financial failure. This is the guy running the show!!

Your post is reasonable but without context it's propaganda. .... Any tariffs, deals, agreements with any county is the end result of 80 years of agreement(s). To say x country has a 20% tariff on another without the context of 80 yrs of negotiations that got to that 20% tariff is simply a snapshot of events between the countries involved and offers just a fraction of information.

Now, as Hyundai building plants here it's seemingly wonderful, fantastic but again it's a part of the negotiations that includes hundreds of other products and geopolitical politics (does the US have military bases in that country, defense agreements/treaties, are they buying our weapons). When did these negotiations start?

Face value this is fantastic but so far all I know is plants will be built in the confederecy meaning it's non-union labor and those employees will be paid 10s of thousands dollars less per yr than a union guy.... Never ever ever ever is that good for the "middle class".

Again, the guy running the show went bankrupt 6 times after losing the equivalent of 418 million in today's money that his Pops left him. ....... He'll fail just like your local Burger King will if he ran it.
- Mr Ricochet

I rail on others for bringing anything political here, so i'm not going to go back and forth, I was kicking myself for even responding to Paul this morning.

You have your opinion, you are entitled to it, and i respect that. I'll just add that i'm in the confedercy now, and wouldn't have it any other way. Do business around some areas with big automotive plants and the workers don't seem to be suffering at all in fact, the most booming places in the US and the fastest growing areas also.

2012–13 negotiationsA new, lower salary cap limit was negotiated for the collective bargaining agreement starting with the 2012–13 season.

And they will be negotiating a new contract. It might be deja vu all over again
- BetweenTheDots

Lower salary cap because the lock out was primarily about revenue share 57/43 players to 50/50 split. Wasn’t because of a decline in hockey related revenue.

Lower salary cap because the lock out was primarily about revenue share 57/43 players to 50/50 split. Wasn’t because of a decline in hockey related revenue.
- LAHawk

It did happen and it always could happen again

It did happen and it always could happen again
- BetweenTheDots

So it happens, then what?

You’re already seeing Tesla being boycotted in the countries that traditionally purchase it.
- paulr

Tesla is now being boycotted and vandalized by goons paid by the Democrats to stir poop up. Let's be clear, the majority of Tesla owners prior to Nov 5th were Democrats. It's an EV ffs. Rich Dems drive Teslas, the middle class/working class Dems drive Subarus, and the rest beg on the street corners. A very small minority of Republicans own Tesla vehicles. Elon may be a genius but this boycott he should've seen coming and that's on him. Back to Subaru for all the Dems!

Tesla is now being boycotted and vandalized by goons paid by the Democrats to stir poop up. Let's be clear, the majority of Tesla owners prior to Nov 5th were Democrats. It's an EV ffs. Rich Dems drive Teslas, the middle class/working class Dems drive Subarus, and the rest beg on the street corners. A very small minority of Republicans own Tesla vehicles. Elon may be a genius but this boycott he should've seen coming and that's on him. Back to Subaru for all the Dems!
- Assman22

I drive a Jeep!